As measures to reform marijuana policy make great strides across the rest of the nation, California continues to lag behind in establishing a statewide system of regulation that protects safe access to patients while addressing governmental interests that promote and enhance public safety.

The work of many drug policy organizations in conjunction with the cannabis industry in Sacramento has helped to force both the California Police Chiefs Association (CPCA) and the League of California Cities to face the fact that reform is inevitable. Even Chief Kim Raney, past president of the CPCA who has opposed all regulation for years finally conceded the need to address this issue in Sacramento this legislative session.

Unfortunately, however, the Chiefs’ willingness to consider change does not extend to engaging the many stakeholders, including patients, the industry, and reform organizations, who have worked to create successful regulatory models in other states in discussions about reform, nor does it extend to accepting legalization and regulation generally.

This is reflected in the minutes of the January Public Safety Committee meeting of the League of Cities (Section IX), which posits that better MMJ regulation “may take the impetus out of a drive toward legalization…” and counts that as a benefit. Later on, the minutes show the influence of the Chiefs in the League voting to exclude working with patient advocacy organizations on this critical piece of legislation.

Despite this pressure, the battle in Sacramento has raged on as competing bills by Senator Correa (SB 1262) and Assemblyman Ammiano (AB 1894) were introduced this session. AB 1894 sought to create a Division of Medical Cannabis Regulation and Enforcement within the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC). It proposed a system of statewide regulations that addressed the issues of cultivation, manufacturing, testing, transportation, storage and distribution while still allowing cities and counties to ban if they so chose. Although this bill would have provided the critical infrastructure to regulate both today and under future legalization schemes, it was defeated by the continued opposition of the Chiefs and the League of Cities in a 33 to 26 Assembly vote.

This bill was largely defeated not by “No” votes, but by the 20 “no votes recorded (NVR)” that included both Republicans and Democrats alike. Capitol insiders shared with me that the NVR votes were based on a number of issues, including continued law enforcement lobbying, legislators engaged in active political campaigns who were reluctant to vote either way, and – best yet – those who supported the bill, but wanted to see the vote closer before they officially supported it.

My question, which I hope you readers will ask your own Assemblymember, is why didn’t they support a piece of legislation that contains the necessary robust regulatory language mandated by the 2014 Department of Justice “Cole memo” that explained how states could abide by federal regulations regarding marijuana policy?

In January, Senator Correa (yes, THAT Senator Correa) introduced SB 1262 on behalf of the League of Cities and the Chiefs. The bill as introduced was opposed unless amended by many organizations, including the California Medical Association, because it contained language designed to restrict and punish medical providers who recommend medical marijuana. [See Vern Nelson, “The Poison Pill in Lou’s Pot Bill.”]

Despite the push by the League of Cities and the Chiefs to exclude patient advocates and other stakeholders from the political process, Senator Correa’s office has, in fact, worked with a number of organizations to amend the language of the bill. But, although the Senator and his staff are to be commended for listening to advocates and presenting a version that is more palatable to the industry and to patients, there are still gaping holes because the bill fails to protect patients and responsible business owners by not properly regulating manufacturing and transportation. The bill currently also fails to address important issues such as consumer protection through product testing, safety or labeling; and leaves the industry still open to criminal penalties by providing no exemptions for licensees.

So I ask readers to look back on the history of Proposition 19, the failed 2010 initiative to legalize marijuana, to show how disingenuous the League and the Chiefs are as they now support patchwork regulation similar to that they warned against in 2010. I still believe that this bill will only fix a few of the problems caused by a largely unregulated industry, and, unless amended to include a strong regulatory process that governs all aspects of a responsible industry, it will not protect California from future federal intervention.

As it stands, SB 1262 is being held in the Rules Committee for referral prior to being assigned to the Assembly Public Safety Committee as well as the Health Committee. My hope is that as it moves forward, SB 1262 will be amended to provide the centralized statewide infrastructure that is needed to support a responsible and maturing medical marijuana industry.

About Diane Goldstein

Diane Goldstein is a 21-year veteran of law enforcement who retired as the first female lieutenant for the Redondo Beach Police Department, (CA). She is a speaker and Executive Board Member for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) and a member of the Moms United To End The War on Drugs Steering Committee. She is a guest columnist for a variety of publications as well as appearing on television , and on radio as a political commentator.

There is a push (as I see it) in Santa Ana by some up and coming politico’s, Alex Flores (Michele Martinez’s boy Friday and rumored successor), Claudio G. (Former OJB Blogger) and other young “free spirit” types pushing for relaxing the rules. On the other side you have the normal political servants to the SAPOA, who are lagging.

In a city with sixteen GUN related events in May, six, drive by shootings, is the sitting council, in an election year that likely to take on this hot potato issue?

The unfortunate part of the VOC’s coverage of Santa Ana is it’s (is that the proper usage Vern?) lack of understanding of the community: A Muslim/Jew from Mission Viejo, A rich West LA kid who graduated high school at 13 and an editor who lives in Irvine……….They don’t get the simple fact: Most Mexican MOM’S equate Marijuana with Heroin. DRUGS ARE BAD to these folks.

This put’s the legislative/governing body in the city in a tough spot. Lose an election or do what’s right?

its, brother. that’s the possessive, like his and her or hers. it’s is short for “it is.”

But then you’re not a professional writer, like certain snots are who are paid well and are supposedly edited by other professional writers, while they use their perch to comfort the comfortable and afflict the afflicted. *cough*moxley*arellano*cough* So I would never bother giving you a hard time about its and it’s.

Next Tuesday there is a SA City Council Meeting where the city is proposing not a ban but actual regulations to compete with a ballot initiative that made it through the signature gathering process. So the city has realized like the Chief’s that a ban does not work. There are some issues with the the cities language and it competes with the ballot initiative that Kandice Hawes placed on the 2014 ballot. Lots of interesting things happening.

What are the problems with the City proposal, can they be fixed? Who on the council brought it forward? Will it even pass?

It’s nice to be in the position of FORCING the authorities to reform on their own, even if their motivation is taking the wind out of our better reform. And it will always be a good thing to debate – take the official half-measure because it’s progress? Or hold out for a not-sure thing?

I just read the minutes form the league of cities agenda. If anyone thinks Lou Correa is a friend of the MMJ community and that the chiefs and league of cities are trying to facilitate a proper regulatory scheme I suggest you read these minutes. Its another trap folks. Seriously its a trap.

The link is in the story. Its the minutes form the league of cities meeting. It says right in it that the bill can still allow municipalities to ban the shops (the ban(s) in place now will never be lifted) (or new ones added). A shop cannot be opened without the proper licenses (which will never be made available), its all a big bullshit circus act made to give the resemblance of progress when in fact its just another stalling technique.

I cannot express to you the public at large and especially the stakeholder (ASA NORML) how fucking evil Lou Correa is which is quite evident given that his bill is supported by both the chiefs association and the league of cities. WTF do you guys not get. These two groups (slong with Lou as their TOOL) will do everything in their power to continue the criminalization of cannabis. No amount of bullshit lip service being given to Lou Correa about how his bill shows “promise or progress” will ever make him give up his fight because he is being paid for in whole by his masters, the police unions and prison guard unions. The only thing Lou Correa can do that is positive for cannabis in the state of California is to … [censored]

Further, the minutes claim that more liberalization of cannabis laws will strengthen the Mexican drug cartels when there is empirical evidence now that shows the Cartels have lost no less than half their revenues form the importation of cannabis into the USA due to the very liberalization of cannabis laws in Colorado and Washington alone.

So that argument is out the window. Continuation of prohibition only fuels the other cartels in the USA AKA POA’s and Prison Guard unions. And of you haven’t figured it out already this is a most egregious form of human trafficking done under the guise of “Public Safety” and Law which is in reality a way to increase danger and human trafficking and the collateral damages done by the war on Drugs AKA the war on people.

There is no reason why we should not be able to go to our local 7-11 and buy cannabis along with Marlboros or Coors Light.

Nameless

Posted June 11, 2014 at 4:58 PM

I am going to challenge this comment. Has Vern revealed My Identity! Fuck, I was worried about the NSA!

FWIW, I agree in principle. But I’m seriously frightened by the irresponsible use of marijuana. I watch day in and day out the clerk at Starbucks, who can’t make change………..I am in Jerry Brown’s corner on this one: Let’s be cautious and wait and see.

Colorado might very well be destroyed in the next ten years. Washington, not so much, they were backwards to begin with.

To further my thought, I wonder how this ordinence will shape up publicly. Will the Boys and Men of Color support a less restrictive program? Hard to say. Those that march and chant for “transparency” and a more involved council will have a pretty hard time convincing those same Mom’s who can’t/Don’t vote that this is good policy. It will be interesting to see how this is framed. Or if it just gets ramroded through.

Perhaps it’s news only to ME, but at last nights Anaheim Council Meeting / Budget Review Facade, I believe it was our Planning Director who stated that the number of Dispensaries in Anaheim was down to 17 and they intend to eliminate those. The replay is down, I wanted to verify my notes on that, will post any changes.

Also, as if the Rukauksaurus hasn’t ALREADY WASTED ENOUGH Tax Money, shilling his UNCONSTITUTIONAL “Pervs in Parks” ban, our Mayor Pro Tem requested staff to agendize efforts next week for a SIMILAR pursuit of HER OWN at STATE level, to have more to fill the white space in those Campaign Flyers.

Since the City Attorney Dept is EXEMPT from the Approvals and Controls of most OTHER Dept.’s spending, and Anaheim (via the CM) has ALREADY bankrolled $25K towards reviving Redevelopment (without telling the public) little will impede them. I guess she figures, if It got HIM re-elected…….

It’s the bans itself that created this problem from the start in Santa Ana. You don;t see this as an issue in places like Oakland, Berkeley, Richmond, West Hollywood as examples of cities that regulated from the start.

You do not get a say in whether a 7-11 is built and opened. There are some zoning rules they have to follow but that’s about it. And try and guess how many DUI’s are the result of the booze bought and consumed from that 7-11. Or how many cancer patients are in the hospital due to the Marlboros bought at 7-11?

And you know what? No 7-11 is banned from an exclusionary zone of 600 or 100 feet away from any school church or hospital. But cannabis clubs are. And guess how many deaths resulted form cannabis? NONE.

Now guess how many people have experienced much greater quality of life due to the use of cannabis to treat their ailments from cancer to headaches etc. And guess how many of those cannabis users go home and beat their wives and kids and go out on rampages due to cannabis use?

NONE.

Now guess how much it costs YOU The taxpayer to pay for the court costs and incarceration costs of non violent cannabis defendants? About 1000 dollars per court appearance. And no less that 180 dollars a day for incarceration.

Seriously, the ban on cannabis needs to go away like the Salem Witch trials.

Paul, does the death of that college kid from ingesting marijuana NOT COUNT? The woman beaten and shot to death by her husband when he was on some kind of marijuana binge NOT COUNT?

I would have thought your time at the farm would have cleared up your thinking. How long did it take you to go on a MJ binge after your release? I think the pusher man was waiting for you at OCJ for your release. Too bad, a brain is a terrible thing to waste.

1. What two incidents are you talking about? Are they similar to the guy that died from drinking too much water too fast, in a water-drinking contest? Did this violent husband JUST SMOKE POT, or smoke and drink and get rattled up on speed? (Besides eating some food, and being psycho.)

2. Paul went to Lacy, not the Farm. And he doesn’t smoke marijuana to get high, never did. He smokes marijuana medically because it really helps with the symptoms he has from his numerous illnesses. Maybe it’s time for you to re-read Part One of The Triumph of Paul Lucas. The last section will tell you why he and many thousands of good law-abiding Californians need to use medical marijuana:

I do get a say on whether a 7-11 is built – because I rallied our neighborhood to petition the Council to stop a zone change that would have allowed a 7-11. The zone change had already been approved by the Planning Commission and the neighborhood made such a stink at a non-televised Council meeting that they reversed the decision of the Commission.

And I don’t know why I debate with human garbage like you Lucas. What you said about Lou Correa is beyond the bounds of human decency. You are a POS.

Paul Lucas

Posted June 12, 2014 at 4:15 PM

The words of Dan C’s only friend ring hollow from your gaping pie hole into the ether of irrelevancy. Your defense of Lou Correa is prima fascie evidence of your decrepitude.

Here is the most recent version which includes many provisions from the Ammiano Bill. So it most glaring problem is they have till 2016 to implement. Last Skallywag I was privy to the Santa Ana Polling. The number was consistent with national polling on supporting medical marijuana. Something like 70%. I think you may be wrong on this passing.